MENTOS EXPLOSION! Max Cowles. The purpose of this experiment was to determine what combination of Mentos and soda pop would yield the most violent reaction, and to investigate the cause of differences in reactions between the different flavors. We used 20 ounce bottles of Coca-Cola, Diet Coke, Pepsi, and Diet Pepsi with two Mint, Strawberry, or Fruit (Yellow and pink) Mentos to create reactions, massing the reactants before and the products afterwards. The general outcome was that Diet Pepsi and Diet Coke lost the most mass while Pepsi and regular Coke retained more than half of their original masses. Also, we found that in all soda flavors/brands, mint Mentos caused the most violent reactions. The reason for Mint’s reactivity is the absence of flavoring which is delivered in a layer of wax-like material around the Mento, removing a lot of the porous surface and making it smooth. Also, the diet sodas low sugar content allowed more moving room for the trapped carbon dioxide. This could be applied if one were trying to get a volcano to erupt and could not figure out how to create gas bubbles quickly enough to cause an eruption. All they would need would be something porous and heavy, so that it would sink quickly.
Results:
Before Reaction:
Coke
Diet Coke
Pepsi
Diet Pepsi
Mass with Mint Mentos
Coke: 641.4 g
Mentos: 5.6 g
Total: 647.0 g
Diet Coke: 626.3 g
Mentos: 5.6 g
Total: 631.9 g
Pepsi: 654.2 g
Mentos: 5.7 g
Total: 659.9 g
Diet Pepsi: 624.5 g
Mentos: 5.6 g
Total: 631.1 g
Mass with Fruit Mentos
Coke: 643.9 g
Mentos: 5.8 g
Total: 649.7 g
Diet Coke: 620.4 g
Mentos: 5.6 g
Total: 626.0 g
Pepsi: 652.1 g
Mentos: 5.5 g
Total: 657.6 g
Diet Pepsi: 619.3 g
Mentos: 5.4 g
Total: 624.7 g
Mass with Strawberry Mentos
Coke: 646.0 g
Mentos: 5.5 g
Total: 651.0 g
Diet Coke: 618.3 g
Mentos: 5.6 g
Total: 623.9 g
Pepsi: 647.1 g
Mentos: 5.6 g
Total: 652.7 g
Diet Pepsi: 623.9 g
Mentos: 5.4 g
Total: 629.3 g
After Reaction:
Coke
Diet Coke
Pepsi
Diet Pepsi
With Mint
344.1 g
246.4 g
335.9 g
299.8 g
With Fruit (Yellow and Pink)
344.2 g
256.4 g
384.6 g
311.3 g
With Strawberry
357.5 g
245.0 g
355.4 g
309.2 g
First Control (Using all types of soda and Fruit Mentos):
Coke + Mentos
Diet Coke+Mentos
Pepsi + Mentos
Diet Pepsi+Mentos
Before
649.6 g
632.5 g
648.5 g
629.2 g
After
313.4 g
255.8 g
305.5 g
241.8 g
Second Control (Using Pepsi and Diet Pepsi and Fruit Mentos):
Pepsi + Fruit Mentos (O+P)
Diet Pepsi + Fruit Mentos (O+P)
Pepsi + Fruit Mentos (Y+P)
Diet Pepsi + Fruit Mentos (Y+P)
Before
655.8 g
624.3 g
657.6 g
624.3 g
After
290.0 g
235.2 g
309.0 g
234.6 g
Journal Article: Significant Structure Theory of Surface Tension of the Alkali Metals
In this experiment, scientists measured the surface tension of alkali metals as well as other thermodynamic proprties. They used adaptations of formulas in order to easily move from liquid surface tension to the surface tension of liquid metals. In order to avoid mistakes, they must take into account the volume-dependence of each metal. Using the iteration method, they were able to determine the molar masses of the substances by finding the average of the gaseous and liquid molarities. They determined that the surface tension was a function of temperature. Also, as opposed to using questionable caluclation methods, they used the significant structure theory to calculate all of their values.
Results:
Before Reaction:
Mentos: 5.6 g
Total: 647.0 g
Mentos: 5.6 g
Total: 631.9 g
Mentos: 5.7 g
Total: 659.9 g
Mentos: 5.6 g
Total: 631.1 g
Mentos: 5.8 g
Total: 649.7 g
Mentos: 5.6 g
Total: 626.0 g
Mentos: 5.5 g
Total: 657.6 g
Mentos: 5.4 g
Total: 624.7 g
Mentos: 5.5 g
Total: 651.0 g
Mentos: 5.6 g
Total: 623.9 g
Mentos: 5.6 g
Total: 652.7 g
Mentos: 5.4 g
Total: 629.3 g
After Reaction:
First Control (Using all types of soda and Fruit Mentos):
Second Control (Using Pepsi and Diet Pepsi and Fruit Mentos):
Journal Article: Significant Structure Theory of Surface Tension of the Alkali Metals
In this experiment, scientists measured the surface tension of alkali metals as well as other thermodynamic proprties. They used adaptations of formulas in order to easily move from liquid surface tension to the surface tension of liquid metals. In order to avoid mistakes, they must take into account the volume-dependence of each metal. Using the iteration method, they were able to determine the molar masses of the substances by finding the average of the gaseous and liquid molarities. They determined that the surface tension was a function of temperature. Also, as opposed to using questionable caluclation methods, they used the significant structure theory to calculate all of their values.
Citation:
< Eyring, Henry. "Significant Structure Theory of Surface Tension of the Alkali Metals." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 69.5 (1972): 1125-1127. Web. 18 Feb 2010. <http://www.pnas.org/content/69/5/1125.full.pdf+html?sid=110e3af3-9fe1-4107-9b53-a1f9f1d300c0>.